DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 1/28/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant argues that coolant line 101 of Foster is not a coolant line. However, since the heat exchange 120 removes heat from item 101, this effectively can be read on as a coolant line. It is noted that the heat exchanger lowers the temperature of the flow path 101. The fluid is harvested from the engine to the heat exchanger which means it effectively gains heat from the engine and it is removed by the heat exchanger. The subsequent argument is with regard to what can be considered normal operations of the heat generating component. The examiner interpreted the limitation as any normal heat exchanging process would be considered a normal operation of the heat generating component. Applicant argues that this only occurs in Foster during an extinguishing event. The Examiner believes this is not illustrated in the claims as currently written. It appears the Applicant is arguing that there is a constant circulation of coolant before a fire is detected. Further, the disclosure does not appear to clearly explain “normal operation” versus alternative operations. The Examiner notes that a normal operation during a fire event would be to disperse the fluid as taught by Foster. Clarification in the claims is requested on this matter and would overcome the Foster reference.
Claim Objections
Claim 9 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Regarding claim 9, “wherein the heat-generating components of the plurality are” should be amended to “wherein the plurality of heat generating components are”
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claim(s) 1 and 3-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Foster (11,446,530) {date of USPG publication}.
Regarding claim 1, Foster discloses a thermal management system for a heat-generating component (engine) within an aircraft (figures 1-3), the thermal management system comprising:
a coolant line (item 101) extending past the heat-generating component to enable coolant to flow past the heat-generating component during normal operation of the heat-generating component;
a heat exchanger (item 120) coupled to the coolant line to remove heat from the coolant line (col. 3, lines 43-46);
a spray outlet (outlet of line controlled by valves) disposed at the coolant line in proximity to the heat-generating component, the spray outlet configured to direct the coolant at the heat-generating component (col. 4, line 56 to col. 5, line 3);
a valve (160A-E) at the spray outlet, the valve being configured to control flow of the coolant from the cooling line through the spray outlet; and
a smoke or fire detector (item 170) disposed within the aircraft, the smoke or fire detector sending a signal to open the
Regarding claim 3, Foster further discloses a system further comprising: a controller (item 199) coupled to the smoke or fire detector and to the valve, the controller being configured to receive the signal from the smoke or fire detector and to actuate opening of the valve to spray the coolant through the spray outlet (col. 4, lines 53-55).
Regarding claim 4, Foster further discloses wherein the spray outlet is one of a plurality of spray outlets disposed along the coolant line, each spray outlet having a corresponding valve, and the smoke or fire detector is one of a plurality of smoke and fire detectors disposed at different locations within the aircraft (see figures 1-3, multiple paths, outlets, and sensors).
Regarding claim 5, Foster further discloses wherein the controller is configured to activate one or more of the valves when one or more of the smoke or fire detectors closest to the one or more valves detects an occurrence of smoke or fire (col. 3, lines 18-31; col. 4, line 53 to col. 5 lines 3).
Regarding claim 6, Foster further discloses further comprising a reservoir of coolant (item 155), the reservoir having a size that is large enough to hold a sufficient amount of coolant for fire suppression.
Regarding claim 7, Foster further discloses wherein the valve is a regulating valve (valve turns on and off by control thus a regulating valve).
Regarding claim 8, Foster further discloses wherein each spray outlet comprises a respective spray nozzle (opening of line constitutes a nozzle opening that delivers the gaseous medium).
Regarding claim 9, Foster further discloses wherein the heat-generating component is one of a plurality of heat-generating components (one or more engines 201); and wherein the coolant line is one of a plurality of coolant lines routed past the heat-generating components (see figures 1-3); and wherein the heat-generating components of the plurality are in proximity to corresponding spray nozzles coupled to the coolant lines (see figures 1-3, dispersing is in proximity).
Regarding claim 10, Foster further discloses wherein the heat-generating component includes a battery, a motor, or a power converter (engine of plane).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 2 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster (11,446,530) in view of Beard (11,413,482).
Regarding claim 2, Foster teaches utilizing carbon dioxide as the coolant but fails to disclose utilizing SCO2.
However, Beard teaches a similar system in the same field of endeavor that teaches utilizing supercritical carbon dioxide as a fire suppressant gas (col. 10, lines 3-15).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize super critical carbon dioxide as taught by Beard as at least a portion of the coolant to the system of Foster, the motivation being this is a known fire suppressant used in combination with inert gases to be effective as stopping or controlling fires.
Claim(s) 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Foster (11,446,530) in view of Baker (2016/0096051).
Regarding claim 8, Foster is silent to specifically describing a nozzle, though generally openings in a conduit to disperse fluids may reasonably be construed as a nozzle.
Baker explicitly recites the use of nozzles (items 210, 212, par. 29) as the dispersal means of an aircraft inert gas fire suppression system (item 202, par. 29).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the invention to utilize nozzles as taught by Baker to the system of Foster, the motivation being that nozzles are known in the field (par. 7) as well as disperse fluids more evenly than general openings.
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ALEX M VALVIS whose telephone number is (571)272-4233. The examiner can normally be reached 9:00-5:00 M-F.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Jonathan Moffat can be reached at 571-272-4390. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
ALEX M. VALVIS
Supervisory Patent Examiner
Art Unit 3791
/ALEX M VALVIS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3791
Prosecution Insights